America’s  Relations 

with 

Asia  and  Asiatics 

Shall  They  be 
Christian  ? 

Treaty  Obligations  of  the  U.  S. 
Failure  to  Keep  Faith  With  China 
The  New  Anti -Japanese  Agitation 
Resolutions  of  the  Federal  Council 
A Positive  Program  for  the  Churches 


m 


A Memorandum  Prepared  by 

SIDNEY  L.  GULICK 

For  the  Commission  on  Relations  with  the  Orient 
of  the 

Federal  Council  of  the  Churches  of  Christ  in  America 
105  East  22nd  Street,  New  York  City 

\\€tt)Ve  4 xo  . 


The  Problem 


How  to  make  right  the  relations  of  the  white  and  yellow 
races  is  the  great  problem  of  the  decades  ahead  of  us.  This 
problem  should  not  be  left  exclusively  to  politicians  to  dis- 
cuss and  decide  on  narrow,  nationalistic  and  economic  con- 
siderations. Christians  should  study  it  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  teachings  and  principles  of  Jesus  and  should  find  a 
Christian  solution.  No  un-Christian  solution  can  be  right 
or  permanent. 

Four  distinct  aspects  of  this  question  need  the  serious 
and  prompt  attention  of  American  Christians.  They  in- 
volve the  moral  character  of  our  nation,  in  the  establishment 
of  right  and  friendly  relations  with  other  nations. 

I.  The  Treaty  Obligations  of  the  United  States 

Our  Government  makes  treaties  with  all  governments, 
including  those  of  China  and  Japan,  in  which  mutual  pledges 
are  given  to  protect  the  lives  and  property  of  citizens  who 
may  be  traveling  or  residing  within  their  respective  juris- 
dictions. 

Congress,  however,  has  never  enacted  appropriate  legis- 
lation whereby  the  Federal  Administration  can  fulfill  these 
pledges.  Already  on  several  occasions  local  anti-foreign 
violence  has  caused  serious  international  strain,  and  on  one 
occasion  even  a rupture  in  our  diplomatic  relations  with 
Italy. 

Four  Presidents  of  the  United  States  have  urged  Congress 
to  take  this  action  and  a bill  drafted  by  Hon.  William  H. 
Taft,  endorsed  by  the  American  Bar  Association,  was  in- 
troduced into  Congress  in  1915,  but  nothing  has  yet  been 
done.  Action  will  be  taken  on  these  proposals  as  soon  as 
a sufficiently  large  number  of  Christian  citizens  are  in- 
formed and  enlisted  in  their  active  support  (See  Appendix 
A). 

II.  Failure  of  the  United  States  to  Keep  Faith 

with  China 

The  treaty  with  China  of  1880  made  provision  whereby 
the  United  States  might  temporarily  suspend  “but  may  not 


2 


absolutely  prohibit”  Chinese  labor  immigration  to  the  United 
States.  Two  of  the  Articles  pledged  “most  favored  nation” 
treatment.  We  have,  nevertheless,  made  the  temporary  sus- 
pension permanent  and  absolute,  and  we  have  completely 
disregarded  the  provisions  for  “most  favored  nation”  treat- 
ment. A dozen  laws  for  dealing  specially  with  the  Chinese 
have  been  enacted.  In  1888  the  Supreme  Court  decided 
a test  case.  The  judgment  was  that  “the  Scott  Act  is  in 
contravention  of  the  treaties”  of  1868  and  of  1880.  The 
Act  was  nevertheless  upheld  as  legal,  yet  the  statement  was 
added.  . . . “This  court  is  not  a censor  of  the  morals 

of  the  other  departments  of  Government.”  It  was  good 
law,  but  bad  international  morals! 

To  keep  faith  with  China  and  to  act  as  a Christian  nation 
should,  the  treaty  should  be  “denounced”  or  those  laws 
should  be  repealed.  If  the  treaty  is  nearly  “denounced”  we 
shall  automatically  return  to  the  earlier  treaty  (1868), 
which  provides  for  free  immigration.  This  is  unthinkable. 
Before  it  will  be  possible  to  repeal  objectionable  laws,  new 
laws  in  harmony  with  the  treaty  dealing  with  the  whole 
immigration  question  in  a Christian  way  must  be  enacted 
(See  Appendix  B,  C and  D). 

III.  The  New  Anti-Japanese  Agitation  on  the 
Pacific  Coast 

A fresh  outburst  of  anti-Japanese  feeling  on  the  Pacific 
Coast  has  developed.  Agitators  are  urging  Congress  to 
adopt  a program  of  drastic  legislation  that  cannot  fail  to 
embitter  the  relations  between  America  and  Japan.  Two 
proposals  may  be  mentioned. 

( 1 )  . Cancellation  of  the  Gentlemen’s  Agreement  is 
urged  on  the  ground  of  its  “gross  violation”  by  Japan.  The 
facts,  however,  prove  that  on  the  contrary  the  Japanese 
Government  has  been  faithfully  observing  it. 

(2) .  An  amendment  to  the  Federal  Constitution  is 
sought,  denying  American  citizenship  to  American  born 
children  if  either  parent  is  “ineligible  to  become  a citizen  of 
the  United  States.”  Bills  are  already  introduced  in  both 
Houses  embodying  this  proposal.  Such  a bill,  if  passed, 
will  create  a permanent  Asiatic  population  among  us  who, 
because  they  cannot  become  American  citizens,  will  neces- 
sarily be  obedient  to  their  Asiatic  Governments.  They  will 
inevitably  resent  such  humiliating  and  discriminatory  treat- 
ment. They  will,  moreover,  no  doubt,  become  the  objects 
of  repeated  political  agitation  and  unjust  legislation.  Japan 


3 


as  a nation  will  be  indignant,  and  will  unquestionably 
criticise  America  as  repudiating  the  Christianity  which  it 
professes. 

Both  proposals  are  unwise  in  principle,  un-American  in 
spirit  and  dangerous  in  practice. 

IV.  Equitable  Immigration  and  Naturalization 

Legislation 

The  establishment  and  maintenance  of  Christian  inter- 
national relations  with  the  Far  East,  as  well  as  the  success- 
ful prosecution  of  missionary  work  in  such  countries  as 
China  and  especially  now  in  Japan,  are  intimately  dependent 
on  maintaining  fair  and  friendly  treatment  of  their  citizens 
in  our  country.  ' Our  present  immigration  and  naturalization 
laws  are  discriminatory  and  humiliating  and  are  deeply  re- 
sented. They  give  occasion  to  and  invite  repeated  anti- 
Asiatic  agitation  and  the  enactment  of  laws  against  aliens 
“ineligible  for  citizenship.” 

These  discriminatory  laws  ought  to  be  repealed.  Yet 
it  is  difficult  to  see  how  they  can  be,  unless  a comprehensive 
immigration  law  is  enacted  which,  while  dealing  equally 
with  every  people  on  general  principles,  will  at  the  same 
time  afford  real  safety  to  the  Pacific  Coast  from  the  dangers 
of  large  immigration  from  Asia. 

Some  method  for  handling  this  complex  problem  should 
be  found  that  will  on  the  one  hand  really  protect  the 
western  states  from  those  dangers  and  yet  at  the  same  time 
be  fair  and  friendly  to  Asiatics  who  reside  among  us,  dealing 
with  them  on  the  basis  of  the  Golden  Rule. 

V.  Action  by  the  Federal  Council  of  the 

Churches 

In  view  of  the  foregoing  considerations  the  Executive 
Committee  of  the  Federal  Council  of  the  Churches  of  Christ 
in  America,  reaffirming  previous  actions,  voted  (December, 
1918)  to  “urge  upon  Congress  and  upon  the  people  of  the 
United  States  the  importance  of  adopting  an  immigration 
policy  based  upon  a just  and  equitable  regard  for  the  inter- 
ests of  all  the  nations  concerned,  and  to  this  end  suggest 
that  the  entire  immigration  problem  be  taken  up  at  an  early 
date,  providing  for  comprehensive  legislation  covering  all 
phases  of  the  question  (such  as  the  limitation  of  immigration, 
and  the  registration,  distribution,  employment,  education 
and  naturalization  of  immigrants)  in  such  a way  as  to  con- 
serve American  institutions,  to  protect  American  labor  from 


4 


dangerous  economic  competition,  and  to  promote  an  intelli- 
gent and  enduring  friendliness  among  the  people  of  all 
nations.” 

Again  in  1919,  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Federal 
Council,  dealing  with  the  entire  range  of  related  subjects, 
passed  the  following  resolutions: 

“RESOLVED:  That  fresh  effort  should  be  made  to 
secure  from  Congress  the  legislation  urged  by  Presidents 
Harrison,  McKinley,  Roosevelt  and  Taft  whereby  the 
Federal  Administration  will  be  enabled  to  fulfill  our  treaty 
obligations  in  providing  ‘The  most  constant  protection 
and  security  for  the  persons  and  property’  of  aliens  resi- 
dent in  the  United  States. 

“RESOLVED:  That  we  regard  with  shame  and  hu- 
miliation the  continued  apathy  of  our  people  and  of  our 
lawmakers  in  regard  to  the  importance  of  faithfully  ob- 
serving our  treaty  obligations  with  China.  We  urge  the 
clergy  of  the  United  States  to  familiarize  themselves  with 
the  facts  and  make  them  known  to  the  people.  We  again 
request  the  Commission  on  Relations  with  the  Orient  to 
take  such  steps  as  may  be  practicable  to  bring  the  matter 
effectively  to  the  attention  of  President  Wilson  and  of 
Congress. 

“RESOLVED:  That  we  regard  with  grave  apprehen- 
sions the  fresh  outburst  of  anti-Japanese  agitation  on  the 
Pacific  Coast.  We  urge  Christians  living  in  areas  where 
Japanese  reside  to  cultivate  personal  relations  with  them, 
seeking  methods  for  the  solution  of  local  difficulties  on 
the  basis  of  brotherhood  and  the  Golden  Rule.  We  depre- 
cate the  injection  of  a race  question  into  politics,  local  or 
national.  We  regard  as  particularly  obnoxious  the  pro- 
posal to  amend  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  so 
as  to  exclude  from  citizenship  American  born  children 
either  of  whose  parents  is  ‘an  alien  ineligible  for  natural- 
ization.’ 

“RESOLVED:  That  we  re-affirm  the  actions  of  former 
years,  calling  for  a policy  in  the  regulation  of  all  immi- 
gration which  shall  be  based  on  a just  and  equitable  re- 
gard for  the  interests  of  all  the  nations  concerned.’’ 


VI.  Concrete  Proposals 

In  order  that  these  general  principles  might  be  expressed 
in  adequate  and  wise  proposals  for  legislation  framed  by 
experts,  the  Secretary  of  the  Commission  on  Relations  with 
the  Orient  of  the  Federal  Council  was  authorized  to  pro- 
mote the  formation  of  an  independent  non-ecclesiastical 
group,  now  known  as  the  National  Committee  for  Construc- 
tive Immigration  Legislation.  It  has  drafted  and  presented 
to  Congress  a bill,  the  main  principles  of  which  are: 


5 


1.  The  admission  annually  of  only  so  many  immigrants 
from  each  people  as  we  can  wholesomely  Americanize 
and  offer  opportunities  to  work  and  live  according  to 
American  standards. 

2.  A flexible  percentage  rate,  making  it  possible  to  adjust 
the  total  volume  of  immigration  to  the  changing  eco- 
nomic conditions  of  the  country. 

3.  The  equal  application  of  these  principles  to  every 
people. 

4.  Advanced  standards  for  naturalization  and  the  pro- 
vision of  facilities  for  Americanization. 

5.  The  granting  of  citizenship  to  all  who  qualify  regard- 
less of  race. 

6.  The  abrogation  of  all  special  laws  dealing  with 
Chinese. 

VII.  A Positive  Program  for  the  Churches 

In  a Republic  like  ours,  questions  that  involve  important 
matters  of  national  policy  require  general  attention  and 
study.  Such  questions  as  are  presented  in  this  Memorandum 
should  be  understood  by  all  Christians  and  especially  by 
the  responsible  church  officers  and  other  Christian  leaders. 

The  issue  at  bottom  is  this:  Do  the  Churches  and  the 
Christian  leaders  in  America  seriously  desire  to  establish 
the  Kingship  of  Christ  in  international  and  inter-racial  re- 
lations? Have  they  the  supreme  conviction  which  made 
Washington  great,  that  our  country  is  to  be  an  instrument 
of  God  in  the  service  of  the  whole  world?  Have  they 
the  determined  will  to  deal  justly  with  the  “stranger  in 
the  land”  according  to  Scriptural  injunction? 

If  these  are  indeed  their  desires,  their  convictions  and  their 
will,  they  will  let  the  Asiatic  situation  drift  no  longer. 

1.  They  will  study  with  intense  earnestness  the  problem 
of  the  relations  of  the  white  and  yellow  races  from  the 
viewpoint  of  the  teachings  of  Jesus,  and 

2.  They  will  unite  as  citizens  in  urging  Congress  to 
enact  proper  laws 

(a)  Enabling  the  Federal  Government  to  keep  its  treaty 
obligations  for  the  protection  of  aliens,  and 

(b)  Dealing  comprehensively  and  equitably  with  immi- 
gration and  naturalization,  and  repealing  laws  that 
are  discriminatory  and  humiliating. 

If  responsible  Christian  leaders  take  active  interest  in 
these  momentous  questions  and  become  conscious  of  re- 
sponsibility for  them,  then  Christians  as  a whole  will  have 


6 


the  same  attitude,  and  effective  action  will  be  secured.  Their 
settlement  will  be  based  on  Christian  principles.  America 
will  carefully  observe  its  treaty  obligations.  Anti-Asiatic 
agitation  will  diminish  and  finally  cease.  The  danger  of  a 
terrible,  pagan  world-convulsion  will  pass  away.  For  the 
Churches  will  have  done  their  duty  in  the  realm  of  their 
great  responsibility  and  opportunity,  the  establishment  of 
the  Kingdom  of  God  in  international  affairs. 

APPENDIX  A 

Adequate  Protection  for  Aliens 


The  Treaty  Obligations 

The  Government  of  the  United  States  is  bound  by  numerous 
treaties  respecting  the  rights  of  aliens.  For  example,  the 
treaty  of  1871  with  Italy  contains  the  following  reciprocal 
pledges : 

“The  citizens  of  each  of  the  high  contracting  parties  shall 
receive  in  the  states  and  territories  of  the  other  the  most 
constant  protection  and  security  for  their  persons  and  property, 
and  shall  enjoy  in  this  respect  the  same  rights  and  privileges 
as  are  or  may  be  granted  to  the  natives  on  their  submitting 
themselves  to  the  conditions  imposed  upon  the  natives.” 

Provisions  of  the  Constitution 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  provides  that  treaties 
“made  under  the  authority  of  the  United  States  shall  be  the 
supreme  law  of  the  land”  (Art.  VI,  2) ; that  the  President 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate  shall  have  the 
“power  to  make  treaties”  (Art.  II,  section  II,  2);  and  that 

“Congress  shall  have  power to  make  all  laws  which 

shall  be  necessary  and  proper  for  carrying  into  execution  the 
foregoing  powers  and  all  other  powers  vested  by  this  Consti- 
tution in  the  Government  of  the  United  States”  (Art.  I,  sec- 
tion VIII,  18). 


Mob  Violence 

Hon.  William  H.  Taft  has  given  a list  of  seventy-three 
aliens  of  different  nationalities  lynched  or  murdered  in  other 
ways  between  1885  and  1910,  in  addition  to  those  who  were 
wounded.  Thousands  have  been  driven  from  their  homes 
and_  their  property  destroyed  by  lawless  mobs.  “At  Rock 
Springs,  Wyoming,  on  November  30,  188S,  there  was  an 
armed  attack  by  one  hundred  men  on  a Chinese  settlement 
in  a inining  town,  in  which  all  the  houses  were  burnt,  and 
in  which  twenty-eight  Chinamen  lost  their  lives,  sixteen  were 
wounded,  and  all  their  property  was  destroyed. 

“In  an  official  note  of  February  15,  1886,  riots  were  reported 
at  Bloomfield,  Redding,  Boulder  Creek,  Eureka,  and  other 


7 


towns  in  California,  involving  murder,  arson,  and  robbery, 
and  it  was  added  that  thousands  of  Chinese  had  been  driven 
from  their  homes. 

“Nine  Italians  were  lynched  in  New  Orleans  in  1891. 

“In  1895  three  Italians  were  lynched  at  Walsenberg, 
Colorado. 

“In  1899  three  Italians  were  lynched  at  Tallulah,  Louisiana.” 

Failure  of  Congress  to  Pass  the  Necessary  Laws 

Although  the  Constitution  clearly  gives  Congress  the  power 
to  pass  legislation  that  would  enable  the  Federal  Executive 
to  deal  directly  with  all  infringements  of  treaty  rights  guar- 
anteed to  aliens.  Congress  has  never  passed  the  necessary 
laws.  It  has  left  to  local  authorities  the  responsibility  of 
carrying  out  the  provisions  of  treaties.  When  these  have  been 
ignored  or  violated,  the  Federal  Government  has  been  help- 
less, because  no  laws  of  Congress  have  given  powers  covering 
the  case. 

In  consequence  of  this  situation  crimes  have  been  committed 
against  aliens  in  a number  of  states,  the  perpetrators  of  which 
have  been  protected  from  prosecution  and  punishment  by 
local  interests. 

The  Federal  Government  has  repeatedly  acknowledged  its 
responsibility  to  the  foreign  Governments  concerned  by  pay- 
ing heavy  indemnities,  and  by  making  humble  apologies.  It 
has  had  to  make  the  humiliating  confession  that  it  was  not 
able  to  fulfill  the  treaty  obligations  it  had  solemnly  assumed. 
In  cases  of  threatened  danger  to  individuals  or  groups  it  could 
not  extend  protection,  and  after  the  crime  had  been  com- 
mitted it  could  not  assure  the  foreign  Government  concerned 
that  the  criminal  or  criminals  would  be  tried  and  impartial 
justice  would  be  administered. 

President  Harrison 

Just  after  the  Mafia  case  at  New  Orleans  in  1891,  President 
Harrison  said  in  his  message  to  Congress: — 

“It  would,  I believe,  be  entirely  competent  for  Congress  to 
make  offences  against  the  treaty  rights  of  foreigners  domiciled 
in  the  United  States  cognizable  in  the  federal  courts.  This 
has  not,  however,  been  done,  and  the  federal  officers  and 
courts  have  no  power  in  such  cases  to  intervene  either  for 
the  protection  of  a foreign  citizen  or  for  the  punishment  of 
his  slayers.” 

President  McKinley 

In  his  annual  message  of  December  5,  1899,  President  Mc- 
Kinley used  these  words: 

“For  the  fourth  time  in  the  present  decade  the  question 
has  arisen  with  the  Government  of  Italy  in  regard  to  the 
lynching  of  Italian  subjects.  The  latest  of  these  deplorable 
events  occurred  at  Tallulah,  Louisiana,  whereby  five  unfor- 
tunates of  Italian  origin  were  taken  from  jail  and  hanged. 
. . . . The  recurrence  of  these  distressing  manifestations  of 
blind  mob  fury,  directed  at  dependents  or  natives  of  a foreign 


8 


country,  suggests  that  the  contingency  has  arisen  for  action 
by  Congress  in  the  direction  of  conferring  upon  the  Federal 
courts  jurisdiction  in  this  class  of  international  cases  where 
the  ultimate  responsibility  of  the  Federal  Government  may 
be  involved.” 

President  Roosevelt 

In  his  annual  message  of  December,  1906,  President  Roose- 
velt said: 

“One  of  the  greatest  embarrassments  attending  the  per- 
formance of  our  international  obligations  is  the  fact  that  the 
statutes  of  the  United  States  are  entirely  inadequate.  They 
fail  to  give  to  the  national  government  sufficiently  ample 
power,  through  United  States  courts  and  by  the  use  of  the 
army  and  navy,  to  protect  aliens  in  the  rights  secured  to  them 
under  solemn  treaties  which  are  the  law  of  the  land.  I there- 
fore earnestly  recommend  that  the  criminal  ‘and  civil  statutes 
of  the  United  States  be  so  amended  and  added  to  as  to  enable 
the  President,  acting  for  the  United  States  Government,  which 
is  responsible  in  our  international  relations,  to  enforce  the 
rights  of  aliens  under  treaties.  There  should  be  no  particle  of 
doubt  as  to  the  power  of  the  national  government  completely 
to  perform  and  enforce  its  own  obligations  to  other  nations. 
The  mob  of  a single  city  may  at  any  time  perform  acts  of 
lawless  violence  against  some  class  of  foreigners  which  would 
plunge  us  into  war.  That  city  by  itself  would  be  powerless 
to  make  defense  against  the  foreign  power  thus  assaulted,  and 
if  independent  of  this  government  it  would  never  venture  to 
perform  or  permit  the  performance  of  the  acts  complained  of. 
The  entire  power  and  the  whole  duty  to  protect  the  offending 
city  of  the  offending  community  lies  in  the  hands  of  the 
United  States  Government.  It  is  unthinkable  that  we  should 
continue  a policy  under  which  a given  locality  may  be  allowed 
to  commit  a crime  against  a friendly  nation,  and  the  United 
States  Government  limited,  not  to  prevention  of  the  commis- 
sion of  the  crime,  but,  in  the  last  resort,  to  defending  the 
people  who  have  committed  it  against  the  consequences  of 
their  wrongdoing.” 

President  Taft 

In  his  inaugural  address,  March  4,  1909,  President  Taft 
said: 

“By  proper  legislation  we  may,  and  ought  to,  place  in  the 
hands  of  the  federal  executive  the  means  of  enforcing  the 
treaty  rights  of  such  aliens  in  the  courts  of  the  Federal 
Government.  It  puts  our  government  in  a pusillanimous  posi- 
tion to  make  definite  engagements  to  protect  aliens  and  then 
to  excuse  the  failure  to  perform  those  engagements  by  an 
explanation  that  the  duty  to  keep  them  is  in  states  or  cities 
not  within  our  control.  If  we  would  promise  we  must  put 
ourselves  in  a position  to  perform  our  promise.  We  cannot 
permit  the  possible  failure  of  justice,  due  to  local  prejudice 
in  any  state  or  municipal  government,  to  expose  us  to  the 
risk  of  a war,  which  might  be  avoided  if  federal  jurisdiction 
were  asserted  by  suitable  legislation  by  Congress  and  earned 
out  by  proper  proceedings  instituted  by  the  executive  in  the 
courts  of  the  national  government.” 


9 


The  Needed  Legislation 

On  January  20,  1915,  Hon.  Richard  Bartholdt  introduced  a 
bill  into  the  House  which  had  been  drafted  by  Hon.  Wm.  H. 
Taft  and  was  later  endorsed  by  the  American  Bar  Association 
at  its  annual  meeting  at  Salt  Lake  City  in  1915.  The  follow- 
ing sections  constitute  the  essential  portions  of  this  bill. 

“For  the  better  Protection  of  Aliens  and  for  the  Enforce- 
ment of  their  Treaty  Rights. 

“Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of 
Representatives  of  the  United  States  of  America  in  Con- 
gress assembled.  That  the  President  of  the  United  States  be 
authorized  to  direct  the  Attorney-General,  in  the  name  and 
behalf  of  the  United  States,  to  file  a bill  in  equity  in  the 
proper  district  court  of  the  United  States  against  any  person 
or  persons  threatening  to  violate  the  rights  of  a citizen  or 
subject  of  a foreign  country  secured  to  such  citizen  or  subject 
by  treaty  between  the  United  States  and  such  foreign  country; 
and  that  this  provision  shall  apply  to  acts  threatened  by  State 
officers  under  the  alleged  justification  of  a law  of  the  legis- 
lature of  the  State  in  which  such  acts  are  to  be  committed. 
The  aliens  whose  rights  are  affected  may  be  joined  as  com- 
plainants with  the  United  States  in  such  equitable  proceeding, 
and  jurisdiction  is  hereby  given  to  the  proper  district  courts 
to  maintain  such  action 

“Section  3.  That  any  act  committed  in  any  State  or  Terri- 
tory of  the  United  States  in  violation  of  the  rights  of  a citizen 
or  subject  of  a foreign  country,  secured  to  such  citizen  or 
subject  by  a treaty  between  the  United  States  and  such  for- 
eign country,  which  act  constitutes  a crime  under  the  laws  of 
such  State  or  Territory,  shall  constitute  a like  crime  against 
the  peace  and  dignity  of  the  United  States,  punishable  in 
like  manner  as  in  the  courts  of  said  State  or  Territory,  and 
within  the  period  limited  by  the  laws  of  such  State  or  Ter- 
ritory, and  may  be  prosecuted  in  the  courts  of  the  United 
States,  and,  upon  conviction,  the  sentence  executed  in  like 
manner  as  sentences  upon  convictions  for  crimes  under  the 
laws  of  the  United  States. 

“Section  4.  That  the  President  of  the  United  States  is 
hereby  expressly  authorized  to  use  the  marshals  of  the  United 
States  and  their  deputies  to  maintain  the  peace  of  the  United 
States  when  violated  by  the  commission  of  such  acts  as  are 
denounced  in  the  preceding  section;  and  should,  in  his  judg- 
ment, the  circumstances  demand  it,  he  is  empowered  to  use 
the  army  and  the  navy  for  the  same  purpose.” 

APPENDIX  B 
Treaty  With  China 

The  principal  provisions  of  the  treaty  of  1880  are  the  fol- 
lowing: 

Article  I provides  that  “the  Government  of  the  United 
States  may  regulate,  limit  or  suspend  such  coming  or  resi- 
dence of  Chinese  (laborers),  but  may  not  absolutely  prohibit 


10 


it.  The  limitation  or  suspension  shall  be  reasonable  and  shall 
apply  only  to  * * * laborers.” 

Article  II  provides  that:  “Chinese  laborers  who  are  now  in 
the  United  States  shall  be  allowed  to  go  and  come  of  _their 
own  free  will  and  accord,  and  shall  be  accorded  all  the  rights, 
privileges,  immunities,  and  exemptions  which  are  accorded  to 
citizens  and  subjects  of  the  most  favored  nation.” 

Article  III  provides  that  in  case  of  ill  treatment  the  “Gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States  will  exert  all  its  power  to  devise 
measures  for  their  protection  and  to  secure  to  them  the  same 
rights,  privileges,  immunities  and  exemptions  as  may  be  en- 
joyed by  citizens  or  subjects  of  the  most  favored  nation,  and 
to  which  they  are  entitled  by  treaty.” 

Article  IV  proves  that  legislative  measures  dealing  with 
Chinese  shall  be  “communicated  to  the  Government  of  China,” 
and  if  found  “to  work  hardship  upon  the  subjects  of  China, 
consultation  shall  be  held  to  the  end  that  mutual  apd  un- 
qualified benefit  may  result.” 

APPENDIX  C 

Anti-Chinese  Legislation 

The  Scott  Law  of  1888  and  the  Geary  Law  of  1892  are  still 
in  force,  though  the  essential  injustice  of  some  of  their  pro- 
visions and  their  disregard  of  Chinese  treaty  rights  are  now 
recognized.  They  are  producing  constant  anti-American  feel- 
ing among  Chinese  legitimately  in  America.  Even  in  cosmo- 
politan New  York  and  in  Boston,  Chinese  sometimes  suffer 
from  the  acts  of  Federal  officers  who  supervise  Chinese  resi- 
dents in  the  United  States,  acts,  moreover  which  are  required 
by  the  laws  and  administrative  regulations  dealing  with  the 
Chinese. 

With  regard  to  the  Scott  Law,  Senator  Sherman  said  that 
it  was  “one  of  the  most  vicious  laws  that  have  passed  in  my 
time  in  Congress.”  It  was  passed  as  a “mere  political  race 
between  the  two  houses  ....  in  the  face  of  a Presidential 
election.”  Senator  Dawes  sarcastically  referred  to  keeping 
the  treaties  as  long  as  we  had  a mind  to.  The  law  was  “a 
rank  unblushing  repudiation  of  every  treaty  obligation  . . . . 
unwarranted  by  any  existing  danger— a violation  such  as  the 
United  States  would  not  dare  to  commit  toward  any  warlike 
nation  of  Europe.” 

With  regard  to  the  Geary  Law,  Professor  Coolidge  makes 
the  following  statement: 

“Meanwhile  the  Chinese  Minister  at  Washington,  the  Consul 
General  at  San  Francisco,  and  the  Yamen  at  Peking  were  also 
protesting  against  the  act.  The  Chinese  Minister  had  steadily 
protested  ever  since  the  Scott  Act  against  the  plain  violation 
of  treaty;  just  preceding  the  Geary  Act,  he  wrote  six  letters 
to  Mr.  Blaine,  only  two  of  which  were  so  much  as  acknowl- 
edged. He  now  declared  that  the  Geary  Act  was  worse  than 
the  Scott  Act,  for  it  not  only  violated  every  single  article  of 
the  treaty  of  1880  but  also  denied  bail,  required  white  witnesses, 
allowed  arrest  without  warrant,  and  put  the  burden  of  proof 


11 


on  the  Chinese.  He  quoted  our  own  statement  on  the  harsh 
and  hasty  character  of  the  act,  not  required  by  any  existing 
emergency,  whose  political  motive  was  well  understood  both 
in  China  and  the  United  States.  In  his  final  protest  he  said: 
‘The  statute  of  1892  is  a violation  of  every  principle  of  justice, 
equity,  reason,  and  fair  dealing  between  two  friendly  powers.’  ” 


APPENDIX  D 

Judgment  of  the  Supreme  Court 

In  1888  the  Chinese  brought  forward  a test  case  dealing 
with  certain  provisions  of  the  Scott  Act.  It  was  believed 
that  the  Court  would  declare  unconstitutional  such  laws  as 
contravene  treaties. 

Justice  Field,  who  pronounced  the  judgment  of  the  court, 
said:  “It  must  be  conceded  that  the  Act  of  1888  is  in  con- 
travention of  the  treaty  of  1868  and  of  the  supplemental 

treaty  of  1880,  but  it  is  not  on  that  account  invalid It 

(a  treaty)  can  be  deemed  ....  only  the  equivalent  of  a 
legislative  act,  to  be  repealed  or  modified  at  the  pleasure  of 

Congress It  is  the  last  expression  of  sovereign  will  and 

must  control.”  “The  question  whether  our  government  was 
justified  in  disregarding  its  engagements  with  another  nation 

is  not  one  for  the  determination  of  the  courts This 

court  is  not  a censor  of  the  morals  of  the  other  departments 
of  the  government.” 

This  made  it  clear  that  a treaty  is  not  the  “supreme  law 
of  the  land”  except  as  Congress  makes  it  so.  Congress  can, 
without  violation  of  the  Constitution,  repeal  or  amend  any 
part  of  a treaty  even  without  securing  the  consent  of  the 
other  party  to  the  treaty,  and  even  without  conference.  Treaties 
are  declared  by  this  decision  to  have  no  binding  power  upon 
Congress.  The  Supreme  Court  declined  to  take  note  of  the 
moral  obligations  of  treaty  pledges.  Disappointing  though  it 
may  be,  this  is  unquestionably  correct  law.  Aliens  deprived 
by  Congress  of  rights  promised  by  treaties  may  not  appeal 
to  the  Supreme  Court  for  the  enforcement  of  those  rights. 

This  makes  it  clear  that  the  moral  obligations  of  our  nation 
must  be  carefully  safeguarded  by  the  people  themselves.  We 
must  hold  our  representatives  in  Congress  to  their  moral  re- 
sponsibilities in  international  as  in  all  other  relations.  This 
is  a matter  of  moral  energy — not  of  law. 


12 


